| Matter of Jalil McC. (Denise C.) |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 04252 [84 AD3d 1089] |
| May 17, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Jalil McC., a Child Alleged to be Neglected.Administration for Children's Services, Appellant; Denise C., Respondent. Steven Banks,Nonparty Appellant. |
—[*1] Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Judith Stern of counsel), nonpartyappellant pro se. Ralph Duthely, Jamaica, N.Y., for respondent-respondent Denise C.
In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the attorney for thechild and the petitioner, Administration for Children's Services, separately appeal from an orderof the Family Court, Queens County (McGowan, J.), dated August 4, 2010, which, after ahearing, dismissed the petition.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements,the petition is reinstated, it is found that Denise C., the maternal grandmother of the subjectchild, neglected the subject child, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County,for a dispositional hearing.
A "[n]eglected child" is defined by the Family Court Act as one "whose physical, mental oremotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as a resultof the failure of [the] parent or other person legally responsible for his care to exercise aminimum degree of care . . . in providing the child with proper supervision orguardianship" (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]). Here, a preponderance of the evidencepresented at the fact-finding hearing demonstrated that shortly after the maternal grandmotherand legal guardian of the subject child had him taken to the psychiatric ward at ElmhurstHospital, the grandmother was informed that the child was ready to be discharged back into hercare. The grandmother, however, refused to take the child. The petitioner repeatedly attempted toarrange a meeting with the grandmother, but she refused to attend, indicating that she wasunwilling to take him home, did not want to have anything to do with the child, and would acceptthe charges of neglect against her. Thus, by refusing to take the child back into her home or tocooperate with the petitioner in arranging for his appropriate care, the grandmother neglected him(see Matter of Janice G. [Linda H.], 70 AD3d [*2]1210,1211 [2010]; Matter of Chantel ZZ., 279 AD2d 669, 670-672 [2001]; Matter of JamesR., 174 Misc 2d 133, 140 [1997]).
Accordingly, the petition must be reinstated, we find that the grandmother neglected thesubject child, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for a dispositionalhearing. Covello, J.P., Eng, Chambers and Miller, JJ., concur.